V-6 engines begin long fade into history

[exitwound]

V-6 engines begin long fade into history | detnews.com | The Detroit News

Of the 40 North American and worldwide vehicle introductions scheduled during press preview days Monday and Tuesday, most will be fuel-efficient, stylish vehicles with four-cylinder engines under the hood.

[...]

When it comes to cars and crossovers, fewer consumers are considering V-6s and carmakers are beginning to exclude them from some lineups. The midsize Hyundai Sonata will no longer offer a V-6, and the future classic 2011 Buick Regal will collect its power from a turbocharged 2-liter engine -- there's no V-6 in its future.

[...]

But consumers say lots of things, and many have no idea what they're talking about. I don't mean to insult my readers, but I've taken phone calls from people talking about the base model 2010 Chevy Camaro's V-8 and their V-6 Ford Focus. (For those not in the know, those cars don't exist.)

"Cylinder count, in the end, may be less important than providing the same or better levels of drivable power and refinement as whatever the customer experienced in the vehicle they are replacing," Brinley said.

Interesting read.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

The turbo 231 V6 was a great engine. I'd love to put one into a boat for fun.

While I agree that 4-cyls make good power, the V6 is inherently more stable/balanced. It sounds better too. This was a huge factor in my deciding to go with the normally-aspirated V6 Mercedes SLK-320 versus its supercharged counterpart, the inline 4-cylinder SLK-230. The 320 sounded WAY better and had the torque/muscle that the smaller 4-cyl just didn't. The 6 has soul. V8s have more of it and V12s are ALL soul like James Brown baby!

Some day I'll get my hands on an old Jag XJS V12 or a BMW 850 V12. I'd love to have either just for how smooth they are and how bloody great they sound!

[dd74]

With the new Obama-pushed CAFE standards, I don't think V6s can compare with 4 cylinder engines.

I've never been a big V6 fan. Apples to apples, most V8s get about two or so mpg less than V6s, but have much more power. I never thought the trade off was worth it.

[911boost]

The new Ford Eco-Boost is a pretty sweet engine....

[dd74]

Originally Posted by BSiple

The new Ford Eco-Boost is a pretty sweet engine....

True. But I thought I read in one of the car mags, Ford's going to a V8 Eco-Boost engine, while the majority of the Eco-Boost motors will be four cylinder.

[exitwound]

I never understood the need for 'power'. There are autophiles, of course, but there are also mom and pop going to the grocery store. They don't need power. They shouldn't have power. There is no need for 500HP on a 65mph limited network. There are so few situations in which you absolutely *need* that power that it's not worth the price, pollution, weight, etc in my opinion. Too many inconsiderate jerks with macho complexes have these powerful engines. *shrug*

[KaptKaos]

I have always wondered why 3 cylinder engines haven't become more common. It's my understanding that a 3 cylinder engine is smoother because of the balanced firing order, like an inline-6. Large 4 cylinder engines (Porsche, Mitsubishi, etc..) have had to use balance shafts to correct this issue.

As for Exitwound's comments: why do you care what other people want or think that they need in terms of perfromance? I can't understand peoples' motivation to dictate what someone else should do.

[exitwound]

Because on the road, they affect ME when they tailgate, when they lane weave, when they blow past the speed limits to show off. It directly impacts my safety on the road. That's why. Do whatever else you want. I don't care.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Automobiles and anything associated with them are never about "need", they're about convenience, image and emotion.

[dd74]

Originally Posted by exitwound

I never understood the need for 'power'. There are autophiles, of course, but there are also mom and pop going to the grocery store. They don't need power. They shouldn't have power. There is no need for 500HP on a 65mph limited network. There are so few situations in which you absolutely *need* that power that it's not worth the price, pollution, weight, etc in my opinion. Too many inconsiderate jerks with macho complexes have these powerful engines. *shrug*

Very true. But power is also marketing. Watch any football game starting tonight through Sunday, and you'll see...

IMO, I'd rather have closer gears than more power. It's still stunning to me how fast the '74 Porsche 911 was because due mostly to its gears. The car only produced 150 hp.

[GG Allin]

I'm a big fan of flat sixes and straight sixes. But the fastest car I've owned had a V6.

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by exitwound

V-6 engines begin long fade into history | detnews.com | The Detroit News



Interesting read.

V-6's won't be going anywhere any time soon.

[jyl]

Reminds me of a prior period (80s?) when suddenly every model had a 4cyl and the performance models were turbo 4s.

On the general topic of how much HP the soccer moms should have, I've thought it was silly to shuttle the kids to soccer with 300HP. But it depends on vehicle weight. If soccer mom is carrying her 2 kids in a Suburban or Expedition, that's one thing. If she moves to a Flex or a Malibu, then 300 HP is even more pointless. Now, people are free to waste their money as they wish, but for the next few years or more, I think wasting money won't be in fashion.

[TechnoViking]

While I've owned a few, I've never been a big fan of the V-6. Either go for the 4-banger to save money or get a big engine for the HP.

My p-car is an exception, of course

[pwd72s]

Just loving the sound this makes...no little 4 banger can match the beautiful noise.

[jyl]

A friend just received a convertible Mustang from her husband, who bought himself a Shelby. He wanted to buy American and not from a bailout company, so that was Ford (note F units +33% in Dec). I got to check out her car - very nice. But I didn't like the big LCD screen - distracting. Does your Bullit have that, or is that something new?

[quaz]

I have to say my GTI makes a great case for the death of the V6. I consistently get 28-30mpg in mixed driving. With just a chip it is as fast as most stuff on the road today. I got into a friendly scuffle with a newer S4 and stay right next to him. That same S4 struggles to get 20mpg on the hwy.

My only complaint is I prefer the sound of more cylinders. The last of the VW VR6s sounded wicked, my 911 sounds sweet and anything with a v8 sounds nice. My GTI.....ehhhh it doesn't do anything for my ears. I guess that is the trade off going forward. Maybe someone will develop a smaller V6 turbo that will achieve the same economy and power. Mazda had a 1.8l V6 in that ugly ass MX-3 for a while.

[dd74]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

V-6's won't be going anywhere any time soon.

They never went anywhere to begin with. V8s are smoother, more powerful, and four cylinders are more fuel efficient. The V6 tries to do both.

The V6s I know run rough and get mileage that isn't much better than a V8. They seem to be an afterthought, IMO.

[dd74]

Originally Posted by pwd72s

Just loving the sound this makes...no little 4 banger can match the beautiful noise.

Your 4.6 is going to become weak sauce when Ford installs the Coyote 5.0 in their new Mustangs.

[924slover]

My favorite v6 ever is the old buick 225 "oddfire" v6 that was in certain old jeeps. I had one swapped into an old jeep cj 2a and that engine had all kinds of torque and power, plus it sounded mean.